[Dark_crow]

Will the Religious Right have far less influence in the 2008 cycle than in recent history.


It appears so...

The religious right's candidate - The Carpetbagger Report

[Choux]

Some leaders of the radical right are deserting some of the Republican hopefulls already. Dobson has just dumped Fred Thompson because he isn't working hard enough to be President and for the right wing moral agenda.

Also, some of the fundimEv ministers are backing traditional Christian issues such as fighting poverty and have added the protection of the environment to their agendas.

Decent citizens are wary of the religious right after all the shebangin's during the Bush Administration.

It seems to me that the radical religious right will have less influence in 08---they will be trumpeting their fear and hate toward the usual institutions and folks, though... decent people are tired of the hate.

[ETWolverine]

Frankly, I don't think it matters whether the "religious right" backs a particular candidate or not. I'd be more concerned if I saw moderate conservatives and moderate liberals having the same sort of dilema. It is the middle-of-the-road voters that make or break an election. Right now, the moderates of both parties are staking out the ground. Once the parties have chosen their candidates, THEN the moderates will be poised to put their support behind one candidate or another. And THAT will be how the election is won or lost. The fact that the far right and far left are having problems supporting a particular candidate won't matter anymore... it'll be the moderates that determine the outcome of the election.

In my opinion, while the religious right as a voting block is important in determining the outcome of the party primary, they are less of a determinant with regard to the general election. In the general election, their importance is as a MONEY MACHINE, not as a voting block. Important, sure, but not the powerhouse that they are in the primaries.

And once a party candidate is determined in the primary, who are the religious right going to vote for? Even if they don't agree with Giulliani or Thompson or McCain, will they vote for Hillary or Obama? Of course not. They'll hold their noses and vote for the Republican candidate, because as far as they are concerned, anything would be better than Hillary or Obama. The religious rights' votes will still go to the Republican candidate.

So I am not all that worried that the religious right is having a hard time backing a particular candidate. Those votes won't be going to the Democrats no matter what happens.

Elliot

[Dark_crow]

Elliot

I tend to agree with you; however, the point is that the Religious Right will not have an administration in their back pocket like they have enjoyed with Bush.

[BABRAM]

Will the Religious Right have far less influence in the 2008 cycle than in recent history.


It appears so...

The religious right's candidate - The Carpetbagger Report

OK! I read the article. It's a subject that I brought up in post awhile back. I do think there is a more distinct possibility that in this election that the conservative voting religious minded contegnecy will be divided behind various candidates. But we will have to wait and see if when the Republican platform is finalized how the support goes. Both party's tend to get a rally of support beyond dissension, with exception of '92 election. BTW my convictions are more conservative when it comes to my faith, which is one reason that I have less and less choice finding representation to my liking in the Democratic camp. I understand when most forums and blogs speak of the "Religious Right," they mean, more-or-less the of people representing the Bible Belt, and conjure up thoughts of droves following televangilists across the nation. Personally I think that's a simpleton equation that gives no recognition to reasonable, intelligent choosing Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc... that may vote Republican. As a registered Democrat, non-liberal, what does the Religious Left represent to be true to their convictions? If you have a right than you have a left. If a Religious Left can be defined, would they clearly support the same candidate?





Bobby

[Dark_crow]

Bobby

Good questions... when we compare the Right and the Left, the left's record has been one of great success while the Right's has been one of failures. The right has only been successful to the degree of holding the left at a standstill. Least we forgett, the left was behind ending slavery, promoting civil rights, Women's Suffrage, Unionization. While Abortion is still legal - at most, they get restrictions on late-term abortions or requirements for parental notification. There is still no government-mandated prayer in schools - at most, there might be a moment of silence in some places. Gays are not only still out of the closet, but anti-sodomy laws are now unconstitutional. Even gay marriage is a realistic possibility right now - something that would have been dismissed as ridiculous two or three decades ago.

[ETWolverine]

Elliot

I tend to agree with you; however, the point is that the Religious Right will not have an administration in their back pocket like they have enjoyed with Bush.

I'm curious... what makes you think that Bush is currently in the back pocket of the religious right?

Has abortion been banned? Has there been any sort of cut in the funding of planned parenthood? Has the NEA had a funding cut under Bush? Has there been a significan increase in the federal funding of any Christian organization? Has there been a decrease in the number of public venues at which religious symbols are being banned? Has there been a federal marriage protection amendment to the Constitution? Has there been a ban on gay marriage at the federal level? Can you point to a single event, a single piece of legislation, a single decision that points to Bush being "in the back pocket of the religious right"?

The closest I have ever seen anyone come to "proving" that Bush is in their pockets is when people claim that Bush is a "member" of the religious right, therefore he must be in their pockets. But the actual legislation seems to disprove that fact. There has been no action on Bush's part to indicate that he is in anyone's pocket. If he were, surely SOMETHING that Bush has done in 7 years would prove that point. The closest we come to any legislation that MIGHT prove something like that is Bush's stance on fetal stem cell research... and considering that much of the medical community is of mixed feelings on fetal stem cell research (because all of the real medical breakthroughs have been in ADULT stem cell research), it can hardly be argued that Bush is listening only to the religious right on that issue either.

I don't want to turn this into a stem cell argument. I am just pointing out that Bush's stance on fetal stem cell research is not exclusively a "religious right" position, but rather has much support in the medical community.

So in fact, there is no real evidence to bear out the accusation that the current president is in the back pocket of the religious right.

And in fact, the religious right will be no worse off after the 2008 election than they were after the 1992 and 1996 elections, even if it turns out the Bush WAS in their pocket. Nothing new here.

Elliot

[Dark_crow]

Elliot

In their back pocket, was perhaps too general; however, all one need do is look at the background of his administration, Federal prosecutors and Judges.

[ETWolverine]

Elliot

In their back pocket, was perhaps too general; however, all one need do is look at the background of his administration, Federal prosecutors and Judges.

What are the religious backgrounds of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito? I don't think either of them is an Evangelical Christian.

I have no idea what Condi Rice's religious background is, but I would GUESS that if she is religious at all, she is probably Southern Baptist.

Anybody know Rumsfeld's religious background? Or Cheney's? Or any other prominent member of the Bush administration?

In fact, other than Bush himself, is there any member of the administration who is an Evangelical? I don't know, so please help me out on this one.

As far as judges, prosecutors and other appointees are concerned, again, do you know the religious background of ANY of them? I don't.

On what basis are you making the statement that if we look at the Bush Administration and Bush appointees, we will see some sort of pattern of Bush being a puppet of the religious right. Are you making an assumption or do you have any sort of proof?

I'll continue this conversation some time next week. I'll be out of touch for the Jewish holiday for the rest of the week.

Elliot

[Dark_crow]

Some leaders of the radical right are deserting some of the Republican hopefulls already. Dobson has just dumped Fred Thompson because he isn't working hard enough to be President and for the right wing moral agenda.

Also, some of the fundimEv ministers are backing traditional Christian issues such as fighting poverty and have added the protection of the environment to their agendas.

Decent citizens are wary of the religious right after all the shebangin's during the Bush Administration.

It seems to me that the radical religious right will have less influence in 08---they will be trumpeting their fear and hate toward the usual institutions and folks, though..... decent people are tired of the hate.

Choux
Contrast that with the Political and Social Views of the Christian Left: Oppose the Iraq war, support the teaching of evolution in the public schools and oppose teaching theories related to the concept of Intelligent Design, believe more strongly in the establishment of religion clause in the first amendment to the Constitution than in the free exercise of religion clause, and support abortion in terms of “a women’s right to choose while generally opposing capital punishment, just to point to a few differences.

[BABRAM]

Least we forgett, the left was behind ending slavery.

Lincoln was a Republican.

promoting civil rights.

It was, perhaps, the last half of the past century that brought the Democratic party to join the forefront on equality issues.

Women's Suffrage .

If I recall correctly that actually was the Republicans again.

Grand Old Partisan: Republican governor first enacts women's suffrage

Unionization.

I think that is correct. Personally, I find good reason to back the Union when their not in bed with the large corporations.

While Abortion is still legal - at most, they get restrictions on late-term abortions or requirements for parental notification. There is still no government-mandated prayer in schools - at most, there might be a moment of silence in some places. Gays are not only still out of the closet, but anti-sodomy laws are now unconstitutional. Even gay marriage is a realistic possibility right now - something that would have been dismissed as ridiculous two or three decades ago.

I think this represents, if anything, that the mainstream left of today is even more liberal than the party was fifty years ago. Enough to make others like myself leave the party in support of Independent and Republican candidates.





Bobby

[Dark_crow]

Elliot

So, that's what you believe, OK.
I am to weary to argue an onslaught of endless particulars whose answers will only bring on another volley. If you don't believe that Reagan, Thatcher and now George W. Bush are followers of Hayekian political economy which Hayek considers to be classical liberalism and who considered himself to be an “Old Whig,” and that that is Right wing Christianity, so be it.

[speechlesstx]

It seems to me that the radical religious right will have less influence in 08---they will be trumpeting their fear and hate toward the usual institutions and folks, though... decent people are tired of the hate.

Decent people are tired of the hate, like these examples from the Kossacks today:

Dems--Don't be afraid to say Bush is crazy
By 2501
Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 01:42:03 PM PDT

OK, so I know I am just as pissed as many people here about some of the recent votes in Congress. You know a few years back, when people were accusing the Democrats of "bringing a knife to a gunfight" in the 2004 elections? Last week's anti-MoveOn vote felt like we had all said, "we know you only have a knife, but we're not afraid to use a gun once in a while, and we've got your back," and the Dems finally decided to use their knife--to stab us in the back with it.

Today I'm listening to a repeat of Randi Rhodes, and she is saying that the reason Dems will not use their power to vote (or, not vote) to cut off funds for the war is that they are all afraid that Bush is so stubborn and/or crazy that he will just leave the troops sitting in Iraq as they run out of bullets.

If the Dems truly believe that, then here is my advice for them:

F**ING STAND UP AND SAY SO!

A bat-sh*t crazy President
By Stash
Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 01:39:27 PM PDT

On September 24, 2007 two Presidents of two different nations made these comments:

1. "You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world."

2. "What religion, please tell me, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people? ... You just can't wear your religion on your sleeve or just go to church. You should be truthfully religious."

3. "I think your ideas are weird, your religion is bat-sh*t, and you talk funny."

Which comment belongs to which President?

This was an easy test, of course.

Comment #1:"You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world" was said by President Bush but could be a paragraph about George W. Bush in his biography.

Comment #2: "What religion, please tell me, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people? ... You just can't wear your religion on your sleeve or just go to church. You should be truthfully religious." was Iranian President Ahmadinejad's retort on 60 Minutes to a question about President Bush supposedly being "a very religious man".

Comment #3: "I think your ideas are weird, your religion is bat-sh*t, and you talk funny" was silently thought by both Presidents (and known to all because their lips moved). [snark]

The American People think David Brooks Smells like Monkey A$$
By WinSmith
Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 07:11:11 AM PDT

This is a sober, serious diary on a very sober and serious topic, which only sober serious people like republicans and Joe Lieberman will understand.

It is about the very grave issue of David Brooks's body odor.

What has become increasingly clear is that the American People, and by the American People I mean me, think David Brooks smells distinctly like stale monkey a$$.

Yep, decent people are tired of the hate.

[Dark_crow]

Bobbie, please, please, what is all of that supposed to prove... please at least Google Christian Right vs Christian Left so that you can at least learn a little about the history of the two.

[Dark_crow]

Decent people are tired of the hate, like these examples from the Kossacks today:
Yep, decent people are tired of the hate.

Yep, that’s the opposite of the Religious Right’s Ann Coulter, etc, etc, etc... I’m tired of all of them. The thing is, you are not quoting the Religious Left so there is a category error in your comparison.

[BABRAM]

Bobbie, please, please, what is all of that supposed to prove...please at least google Christian Right vs Christian Left so that you can at least learn a little about the history of the two.

Well I don't think I'm above learning. When possible I like the historic facts to be part of the dialogue. I wonder why that would bother you?


Bobby

[speechlesstx]

Yep, that’s the opposite of the Religious Right’s Ann Coulter, etc, etc, etc...I’m tired of all of them. The thing is, you are not quoting the Religious Left so there is a category error in your comparison.

Well DC I find that irrelevant to my comments to Choux. She knows what I'm talking about.

[tomder55]

I can't wait to begin reading the latest Bill Sammon book on the Bush Presidency 'The Evangelical President' .

Really ;the laugh is on people who think that with the nadir of this Presidency his influence will cease. I tell you that it was revealed today that Bush has concluded that Hillary may very well be President and he has been secretely pushing her prospects above others like Obama ;who he thinks is not informed enough to be a good President. He has been in discussions with her about the continuity of the Bush Doctrine because like the Truman Doctrine before it ;the policy will be applicable long after this administration ;and it will be bipartisan from year to year with both Republicans and Democrats being the stewards.

I read today that Hillary will be the most religious of the Democrats running since Carter . Unlike the posturing of the former President Clinton Hillary evidently believes.

The horde has been stopped and the wave of extreme liberalism has come to and halt . America is returning to it's moderate conservatism and everyone can ridicule the so called "religious right " all they want to .It has been a very effective counter-revolution.

More tomorrow got to run now .

Edit : it should read that the religious right has been PART of a very effective counter-revolution

[Dark_crow]

I can't wait to begin reading the latest Bill Sammon book on the Bush Presidency 'The Evangelical President' .

Really ;the laugh is on people who think that with the nadir of this Presidency his influence will cease. I tell you that it was revealed today that Bush has concluded that Hillary may very well be President and he has been secretely pushing her prospects above others like Obama ;who he thinks is not informed enough to be a good President. He has been in discussions with her about the continuity of the Bush Doctrine because like the Truman Doctrine before it ;the policy will be applicable long after this administration ;and it will be bipartisan from year to year with both Republicans and Democrats being the stewards.

I read today that Hillary will be the most religious of the Democrats running since Carter . Unlike the posturing of the former President Clinton Hillary evidently believes.

The horde has been stopped and the wave of extreme liberalism has come to and halt . America is returning to it's moderate conservatism and everyone can ridicule the so called "religious right " all they want to .It has been a very effective counter-revolution.

more tomorrow gotta run now .

Let me paraphrase Mark Twain and state unequivocally that the death of the left has been greatly exaggerated; it's like a Hydra, a monster composed of numerous heads. So which head are you referring to: Communism, Socialism, Nazism and Fascism, the peace movement, the environmental movement, Secular Humanism, multiculturalism, political correctness or the Christian Left. Just what exactly is liberalism? Just which 'head' do you think has been cut off?

Recently, there has been an increase in books and Web sites by religious liberals, national and regional conferences, church-based discussion groups and new faith-oriented political organizations. "Organizationally speaking, strategically speaking, the religious left is now in the strongest position it's been in since the Vietnam era," said Clemson University political scientist Laura Olson.

Is there any semblance of a religious left in the United States today that could counterbalance the religious right; look out, I think their coming.

[iamgrowler]

Bobbie, please, please, what is all of that supposed to prove...please at least google Christian Right vs Christian Left so that you can at least learn a little about the history of the two.

You can't really be that ignorant of American History, DC -- And I'm even cutting you slack based on the presumption that you attended Public Schools.